Friday, August 31, 2012

Dear Editor:I am a Montana State Senator. I disagree with your article, "Redefining Physicians' Role in Assisted Dying," claiming that assisted suicide is legal in Montana. At the very least, Montana law is unclear.

Since then, competing articles have appeared in the official Montana State Bar publication disputing whether Baxter legalized assisted suicide.[2] The editor's headline states: "Court ruling still leaves the issue open to argument." [3]

Correct reporting would be that assisted suicide is not legal in Montana and/or hotly disputed. Thank you for your attention to this matter.Senator Greg HinkleThompson Falls, MT

Dear EditorI am a lawyer in Washington State, one of two states
where assisted-suicide is legal. The other state is Oregon, which has a similar
law. Lisa Lehmann's article, "Redefining Physicians' Role in Assisted Dying," is
misleading regarding how these laws work.First, the Oregon and Washington laws are not limited to people in
their "final months" of life.[1,2] Consider for example, Jeanette Hall, who in
2000 was persuaded by her doctor to be treated rather than use Oregon's law.
She is alive today, twelve years later.[3]Second, these laws are not "safe" for
patients.[4][5] For example, neither law requires a witness at the death.
Without disinterested witnesses, the opportunity is created for the patient's
heir, or someone else who will benefit from the patient's death, to administer
the lethal dose to the patient without his consent. Even if he struggled, who
would know?Third, the fact that persons using Oregon's law are "more financially secure" than the general population is consistent with elder
financial abuse, not patient safety. Do not be deceived.

* * *

[1] Margaret K. Dore, "Aid in Dying: Not Legal in Idaho; Not About Choice,"
The Advocate, official publication of the Idaho State Bar, Vol. 52, No.
9, pages 18-20, September 2010, available at http://www.margaretdore.com/pdf/Not_Legal_in_Idaho.pdf.[2] Kenneth Stevens, MD, Letter to the Editor, "Oregon mistake costs
lives," The Advocate, official publication of the Idaho State Bar, Vol.
52, No. 9, pages 16-17, September 2010, available at http://www.margaretdore.com/info/September_Letters.pdf[3] Ms. Hall corresponded with me on July 13, 2012.[4] See article at note 1. See also Margaret Dore, "Death with Dignity": A
Recipe for Elder Abuse and Homicide (Albeit Not by Name)," at 11 Marquette
Elder's Advisor 387 (Spring 2010), original and updated version available at http://www.choiceillusion.org/p/the-oregon-washington-assisted-suicide.html[5] Blum, B. and Eth, S. "Forensic Issues: Geriatric Psychiatry." In
Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, Seventh Edition,
B. Sadock and V. Sadock editors. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams and
Wilkins, pp. 3150-3158, 2000.

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Users of assisted suicide "are overwhelmingly white, well educated and financially comfortable."[1] They are also age 65 and older.[2] In other words, users are older people with money, which would be the middle class and above, a group disproportionately at risk of financial abuse.[3]

The Oregon and Washington assisted suicide acts, and the similar Massachusetts proposal, do not protect users from this abuse. Indeed, the terms of these acts encourage financial abuse. These acts allow heirs and other persons who will benefit from an elder's death to actively participate in the lethal dose request.[4] There is also no oversight when the lethal dose is administered, not even a witness is required.[5] This creates the opportunity for an heir, or someone else who will benefit from the person's death, to administer the lethal dose to that person without his consent. Even if he struggled, who would know?Under the Washington act and the Massachusetts' proposal, the death certificate is required to reflect a natural death.[6] In Oregon, a natural death is listed by custom.[7] A concerned nephew, learning that his aunt has suddenly died and that she had a new will favoring a ne'er do will son, will thereby be mislead as to what actually happened.This does not mean that all deaths under the Oregon and Washington acts are abusive or without consent. What it means is that these laws, and the similar Massachusetts proposal, invite abuse and have a distinct lack of transparency. In Oregon, not even law enforcement is allowed to access state-collected information about these deaths.[8] Even if the person struggled, who would know?For more information about specific problems with the Massachusetts' proposal, click here and here. For a "fact check" on the proposal, click here.